No I haven't because I know exactly why: The world is not a perfect place.

Quote:

Are we talking missile strikes into terrorist cells in civilian areas or missile strikes into militant bunkers? Either way, it's pretty precise but there's always the chance of killing innocents in the process. Such is war, and that's the sort of decisions the Military makes. Never suggested it was easy.

Exactly, we should never try to fix or prevent things because it's impossible to be perfect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Har

Uhhh, there's a reason why I said the 1940s. The 1940s was the start of what we have today as far as how our society works, but people have taken our mechanics and turned it against us and that's why we are where we are today.

You do realize the 40s were the burgeoning of the progressive menace you so despise?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Har

You're exactly right. For some reason politicians believe that if they enact a bill what just happened can never happen again. But the laws of economics are like the laws of nature, they cannot be altered, added, or removed; they are permanent.

There are no unalterable laws of economics. We started as hunters and gatherer and now we have a global economy.

You do realize the 40s were the burgeoning of the progressive menace you so despise?

We have to start viewing political parties not on the left and right but up and down and look at forms of government as left and right. The up and down are what we in America call the Republicans and Democrats while the left and right is Big Government and Small Government (respectfully). The farther left you go the more Communist a country is, the farther right the country turns to Anarchy. There is a middle ground where enough political intervention that keeps the people in order yet allows them to enjoy their freedom.

The political parties really don't matter in the short term but over time if one particular part dominates, they can push the country into a particular direction whether it be communism or anarchy. For the most part they are suppose to bounce back and forth.

If the government didn't allow the people to have particular rights in their companies, the companies would just go on and use us more as slave labor rather than paid employees. Like I said there is a middle ground between what is right and what is wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Working Class Hero

There are no unalterable laws of economics. We started as hunters and gatherer and now we have a global economy.

You're right, we did make the laws, but these laws were slowly generated over time as economies because more and more interconnected and more dependent on each other. I should correct myself that these laws can be changed but that is not something that we can see within our lifetime, it takes many, many years for something like this to happen. What I am saying is that you just can't wake up and expect that printing more money won't create inflation or not paying a debt will not make it lower.

Exactly, we should never try to fix or prevent things because it's impossible to be perfect.

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. I was not implying we shouldn't try to reduce war or be more humane about it, but rather stating the truth of the matter:

-War is ugly.
-War will, in some way, always be ugly.
-People die in war (at least, actual wars as opposed to a single individual "declaring war" on another).
-To win a war, you must sacrifice some sort of resource to achieve a goal. -According to 1984 by George Orwell, the most directly effective yet least benevolent method is for the goal to be the sacrifice of that resource.
-Resources can range from human beings to the materials that are used to create the weaponry used in war to a strategic position.
-A war without bloodshed or weaponry is not actually war. More likely, it's either economics, politics, or a video game.
-[FALLOUT]War...war never changes.[/FALLOUT]

As of 3/14/10, TSL is restored. The Sith Lords Restored Content Modification by Stoney and Zbyl has been finished and can be downloaded here.

People have never acted with common sense, and there was no Golden Age. Whether people will eventually develop common sense, and move in to a Golden Age is debatable. Personally, I doubt such a thing will happen unless certain somewhat technological advancements are made (and honestly, as with all tech, who knows what new problems they'll create).

As for the threat of terrorism, I have two answers.

If we are referring to Islamic extremist terrorism, the only way that it will truly be cut down to a near negligible level (no form of extremism is ever truly eliminated), is if the moderate Muslim population rejects the extremists in a more active fashion. Right now, many moderate Muslims talk about how they disapprove, acting passively. Leaders within the community need to take a more active stance in separating the extremists from the general community.

If we are referring to terrorism in general, it will never be eliminated. People will always have differing views, and there will always be those who try to force their views upon others with violence and intimidation. The most we can do is try to find out about attacks before they occur, and prevent them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Working Class Hero

Exactly, we should never try to fix or prevent things because it's impossible to be perfect.

Trust me, we do try to minimalize civilian casualties, often to a degree that puts us at more risk. It just hurts sometimes that people get so angry whenever a tragic accident occurs, seeing it as evidence of our 'evil', when we could be saving hundreds of millions of dollars by using slightly less fancy weapons that would achieve our objectives just as well, albeit with more civilian casualties. We are investing huge amounts of money and personal risk to avoid this sort of thing. There's a reason that the number of civilian deaths in the entire Iraq war (including civilian-on-civilian crime, which is quite common, and those killed by our enemies) is only about double the amount of civilians killed in a single 8-day bombing mission in WWII.

Improvements are being made, it's just irritating and a bit upsetting that so many people think we can just press a magic "make it better" button and eliminate the problem.

I'd just like to point out that the opposite of anarchy isn't communism, it would probably be totalitarianism, and those aren't the same thing. In fact, it is my understanding that the ultimate goal of communism is something not too dissimilar to anarchy, with the elimination of the ruling class and the communal ownership of resources and all that.

I'd just like to point out that the opposite of anarchy isn't communism, it would probably be totalitarianism, and those aren't the same thing. In fact, it is my understanding that the ultimate goal of communism is something not too dissimilar to anarchy, with the elimination of the ruling class and the communal ownership of resources and all that.

Interesting catch, although I am not 100% sure about your analogy, Doomie.

I personally would argue that real communism and anarchy are close to the same thing. Governments that have been labeled as communist in the past have been far from what the concept was supposed to be. The problem with communism is that people are inherently s-bags and cannot help themselves to more pie than they are due. So abuse of power happens..... just like in our capitalistic government! S-bags know no foreign land, they are everywhere, they are hard to stop, and must be dealt with harshly at any opportunity presented to you. If someone is dirty they should go down. That is another piece of my common sense.

If your perception of the world depends on a nationalistic belief that your flavor of political representation is the best and should be the model, you have never used your mind other than as a recording device.

If your perception of the world depends on a nationalistic belief that your flavor of political representation is the best and should be the model, you have never used your mind other than as a recording device.

This should be a famous quote right here.

"There is no such thing as coincidence, only inevitability" - xxxHoLiC

I'd just like to point out that the opposite of anarchy isn't communism, it would probably be totalitarianism, and those aren't the same thing. In fact, it is my understanding that the ultimate goal of communism is something not too dissimilar to anarchy, with the elimination of the ruling class and the communal ownership of resources and all that.

Communism is very far from anarchy, because the whole ideology is very naive and believes that humans are smart by nature, and that by removing the government people will be happy to work in their new, completely equal country. And live according to it´s laws. A pretty good theory actually, but its only that, it can never work because humans are despicable creatures only driven by goals such as advancing themselves. As Qui-Gon Glenn said, past "communist" countries have been very far from actual communism, and rather represented pure selfishness by being totalitarian countries. Anarchism is more about every man making his own rules.

Saivoīs New demo, A Cruel Northern Land is out! Listen to it on our mikseri.net bandpage.